Jump to content

No referrals in India-South Africa series

Mr. Wicket

By Mr. Wicket
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

thevortex Newbie

thevortex

Posted
Posted
if the mistakes were honest they wouldnt be entirely favouring one team or two teams ... Now please dont rubbish this as preposterous .... there is even evidence in the form of video footage.
Covert racism and discrimination have always existed in the Western world. And based on my relatively recent experience they still do. So, if you are talking about the 'pre-neutral umpires' era, then yes I agree to an extent. But after the advent of neutral umpires, I dont think it is as much a question of discrimination as competence and split second decision making. Nowadays we are our worst enemy when we hear Indians criticizing preparing turning tracks! We dont need anybody external at all, it appears. :)
Link to comment
thevortex Newbie

thevortex

Posted
Posted
Iam sorry but pls let me know which post you are refering to ...
Post No. 52. Specifically this portion to start with, if you please: "If there is data on that subject then it is bound to show why Hawkeye is wrong in many cases. By the way are you telling me that you agree with what Hawkeye shows all the time as far as the ball path is concerned? Simply put you are ready to blindly believe in the ICC. To me as an avid and passionate cricket lover, the ICC has given no evidence of being well organized, structured and logical about its decisions till date. And David Richardson spewing out percentages does not mean that that is the very essence of truth. Not for me at any rate".
Link to comment
thevortex Newbie

thevortex

Posted
Posted

Thanks for responding, Bossbhai. For my part I think you are overestimating the ICC and overtly generalizing (if such a thing is possible) the tendencies of umpires in world cricket. But I think we can safely agree to disagree. :) PS- Hawkeye may not show a ball as brushing leg stump when it was hitting off stump. But hey, if that is our expectation, I dont think we need to look at something as expensive as Hawkeye. The TV umpire could just take a second look at it in Super Slo Mo and take a call!! But well, that is just me though.

Link to comment
Gunner_Mania Newbie

Gunner_Mania

Posted
Posted
Answer me this one question, kpsrinivasan. I am guessing you are in the habit of watching whole matches fairly regularly. Tell me did you find the predicted path of Hawkeye reliable enough to use it as the sole basis for decision making at the highest level of the game? After that, I would love for you to consider this point. Technology per se was supposed to come in as an aid to the umpires so that they may then make the decision thus empowered. Right now, Hawkeye and its implementation methodology have made it such that they are not just an aid that the umpire can consult with and then make his own decision. Hawkeye is the basis of the decision. Now, we must all shudder and shake after reading this statement. Hawkeye is the sole basis for the decision. The umpire may not overrule his aid.
That is the point I feel I have not been able to get through to you. Are you telling me that Hawkeye's predicted path is 0% accurate. Forget Hawkeye & Dave Richardson's views, comon sense would tell you and me having seen Hawk-eye or even just knowing that the business exists and it has been adopted by Tennis & cricket that it must be more than 50% accurate. I don't belive that even you would dispute that. If we both do agree on that point then going back to all my posts you will see at no point am I in favour of Hawk-eye being used as a sole basis of decision making. I am all for the on-field umpire to make the decision and his say being final. What Hawk-eye should do and I believe is doing is to help him to reach the right decision where you , me and everybody else believes he is made a massive mistake. Where Hawk-eye cannot prove that he has made a massive mistake, he should retain the call. And finally, how did you arrive on that conclusion - the conclusion which I have highlighted above. Having watched the entire Eng-SA series live, I am 100% certain that, that understanding of yours is incorrect. The umpire makes a decision. The aid says, you are right, you are wrong, or I don't know. Subsequently, the umpires decision stays, the umpire changes his decision, the umpires decision stays.
Link to comment
thevortex Newbie

thevortex

Posted
Posted
That is the point I feel I have not been able to get through to you. Are you telling me that Hawkeye's predicted path is 0% accurate. Forget Hawkeye & Dave Richardson's views, comon sense would tell you and me having seen Hawk-eye or even just knowing that the business exists and it has been adopted by Tennis & cricket that it must be more than 50% accurate. I don't belive that even you would dispute that. If we both do agree on that point then going back to all my posts you will see at no point am I in favour of Hawk-eye being used as a sole basis of decision making. I am all for the on-field umpire to make the decision and his say being final. What Hawk-eye should do and I believe is doing is to help him to reach the right decision where you , me and everybody else believes he is made a massive mistake. Where Hawk-eye cannot prove that he has made a massive mistake, he should retain the call. And finally, how did you arrive on that conclusion - the conclusion which I have highlighted above. Having watched the entire Eng-SA series live, I am 100% certain that, that understanding of yours is incorrect. The umpire makes a decision. The aid says, you are right, you are wrong, or I don't know. Subsequently, the umpires decision stays, the umpire changes his decision, the umpires decision stays.
kpsrinivasan - I wish it were so. I wish Hawkeye's representation is something the umpires are able to overrule - TV or on field. Can you confirm that to me please? is there anything in the rulebook for that? From what little I have read from the new UDRS rules, there is no over-ruling Hawkeye. And yes, I can wholeheartedly say that Hawkeye is definitely more than 50% accurate. It is not a bad tool per se, you know. And dont think I am against all technology. I am a tech man myself but see, I dont see the point in the hurry with which this has been ushered in at the highest level without proper testing at the lower levels. Plus the botched up implementation.
Link to comment
Feed Newbie

Feed

Posted
Posted

No referrals in India-South Africa series India has once again chosen not to employ the Umpires Decision Review System for the upcoming home series against South Africa. More... No referrals in South Africa series BIPIN DANI Mumbai Jan. 31: India has once again chosen not to employ the Umpires Decision Review System for the upcoming home series against South Africa. According to board sources, former South Africa wicketkeeper and ICC general manager (cricket) David Richardson was prepared to come down to India to explain how the referral system could be put in place, but the Board of Control for Cricket in India and Cricket South Africa mutually agreed not to use it for the series. The UDRS is presently being implemented on a series-by-series basis and is yet to be tried in India, even though the ICC approved it in June last year. The BCCI had refused to enforce the system when it was first put to vote, questioning it’s effectiveness. The boards opposed to the system also want the ICC to foot the bill for the technology needed to implement it. As of now, the system has evoked mixed reactions with some players and officials reckoning that it undermines the on-field umpire’s authority. Under the system, players can challenge close calls — a side can twice challenge an umpire’s decision which is referred to the third umpire for adjudication. Interestingly, South Africa used the system in the home Test series against England — which ended in a 1-1 draw — after initially opposing it along with India. Their two Tests in India at Nagpur (Feb. 6 to 10) and Kolkata (Feb. 14 to 18) will be supervised by England’s Ian Gould and Australia’s Steve Davis. The match-referee for both Tests is Andy Pycroft of Zimbabwe.

Link to comment
Gunner_Mania Newbie

Gunner_Mania

Posted
Posted

They can keep doing this as long as it is home series or at worst sub-continet series. The moment they go abroad for a test series suddenly they are going to be faced with the UDRS and will have no clue how to use with it. On a lighter note, Dave Richardson will rue another missed opportunity to convert the vortex:P

Link to comment
thevortex Newbie

thevortex

Posted
Posted
They can keep doing this as long as it is home series or at worst sub-continet series. The moment they go abroad for a test series suddenly they are going to be faced with the UDRS and will have no clue how to use with it. On a lighter note, Dave Richardson will rue another missed opportunity to convert the vortex:P
Good point. :) Dave Richardson cracks me up with his percentile-quoting from thin air. Pure magic, that is!
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...